My point is that you're deluded.

You mean like how it is now? Seems to be fine for most people.

Alberta had a referendum on whether citizens wanted permanent DST and the result was, "no." But it was always something that the PC government wanted for some reason so in their wisdom decided to do it anyway. I'm fairly confident that a year from now Albertans will overwhelmingly hate it, just as they did in 1974 when it was last tried in the US. Sunrise at close to 10am isn't going to be loved by most people. While most people hate time changes, they will hate permanent DST in the winter even more. Hopefully sanity will prevail and they'll just go to permanent standard time.

That was a bit snarky and could lead to an irrelevant technical debate.

I should point out that, most importantly, when OpenAI claims that they air gapped these systems in any way (including just isolating them as a VM with no network device attached), I DO NOT BELIEVE THEM. They have done nothing to suggest that they are being honest about the situation. They only admitted fault when they got caught and then only in such ways that would allow them to weasel out of any legal liability.

It does not matter if an AI system can escape an air gapped system because we have no reason to believe that is what actually happened.

You and I clearly have a different definition of air gapped.

Programs do not just randomly do this. The guys at OpenAI knew the capabilities of the software, wrote its instructions, and intentionally ran the program.

They are only claiming these things are rogue because they got caught and they see this absurd claim as a way to avoid liability.

If I wrote a worm, tested it on my local network despite knowing that by design it could escape that local network and cause real damage, and then it did exactly that, no prosecutor, judge, or jury will let me off the hook when I claim I only intended to test it on the local network.

I would love to see the AGENTS.md for this thing. . .

No it's worth the full $300. Storage is binary. You either have enough or you don't. If you are 12GB short, the only option is to pay full price to upgrade, you can't al-a-carte the number of GBs on your SSD. The idea of breaking this down to an individual per gigabyte cost is stupid as that option is not available for anyone.

False. SSDs are not sold on a per GB basis. You either have the space you need or you don't. If the latter is that you're 5GB short, then the direct cost and saving to you is the incremental upgrade to the next model of hardware which is $500 (ex-tax) for a Macbook Pro, or $100 for a Macbook Neo

WTF are you talking about? Many people just put a tiny piece of black tape over it.

There's not a society in the world (including Constitution thumping US of A) that doesn't ban products. None. Some products are not compatible with society. You're not being penalised, you can always move to a different society if you don't want to live under the shared values (laws) which underpin the one you chose.

I mean you *can* punch someone, but how much will you be willing to pay in legal fees for the privilege of doing so? If someone has a punchable face, do you really want to gift them money in the inevitable payout you suffer when they charge your dumbarse with assault?

Not in the USA, but plenty of other countries have negligent hacking coverage. "Unauthorised access" in the UK sense doesn't require any intention, just that you don't access a system in a standard way with credentials assigned to you.

In Australia OpenAI would have most definitely broken the Criminal Code (1995) Part 10.7 - Computer access with multiple examples of it's antics except... the very first line of every subdivision of the law is: "A person commits an offence if:"

Back when the laws were written no one anticipated that the law would be broken autonomously by a non-person. The concepts of computers making decisions they weren't explicitly programmed to was foreign.

Well, there's been at least 3 posts about it so clearly, somebody cares.

Why is it that the only law you seem to know about is killing someone? Product safety goes far beyond that. As do actions of people. This is Slashdot, how have you missed the literally countless articles we have run about laws that cover "unauthorised access of a computer".

OpenAI has objectively broken many laws already, the problem is those laws were written in language that never could predict that a machine may break them autonomously.

I literally do.

That's the issue here. Something unsubsidized without government involvement is generally considered at the whim of the people. Their objections can kill a project. On the flip side something subsidized is directly the result of enacting government policy. People don't come into it unless it's an election year, and even then in many "safe seats" people don't come into it at all. What they gonna do? Vote democrat? LOL